This is just a suggestion, not a knock or anything against the poster. But a solution I think could work is to rotate the hook 90 degrees and have 2 of them, one at each end. Then it would remain flat and balanced no matter where the belts are on the rack.
Not a perfect solution, you wont see or have access to the belts at the back and the mount takes up more space on the rail. But at least you aren't playing a balancing game each time you take a belt.
I think I’d hang the hook off the end, so that the belts are stored in a vertical tree (slightly sloped, so that they don’t fall over each other.) But that’s an entirely new redesign for something that only really matters if you care about it.
That's my thoughts too.
This is just a suggestion, not a knock or anything against the poster. But a solution I think could work is to rotate the hook 90 degrees and have 2 of them, one at each end. Then it would remain flat and balanced no matter where the belts are on the rack.
Not a perfect solution, you wont see or have access to the belts at the back and the mount takes up more space on the rail. But at least you aren't playing a balancing game each time you take a belt.
I think I’d hang the hook off the end, so that the belts are stored in a vertical tree (slightly sloped, so that they don’t fall over each other.) But that’s an entirely new redesign for something that only really matters if you care about it.